Search results

This is why I'm an advocate of converting all the CAF WO ranks to versions of staff sergeant, master sergeant etc to supply the NCM leadership required and using the WO rank title the way that the American army does as a rank group that falls between the current NCMs and officers. I would see...

I'm the last guy to say that something can't be done but in this case the attempt was there before back in the 2000s. It failed for a number of reasons mostly lack of resources and a decent methodology. The CAF is a little anal when it comes to creating "equivalencies" for civilian trades and...

The two concepts work together. You need to think in days because that's how the whole public service/military complex operates. It's fundamental to pay which is what makes the PS world go round. It's also fundamental to programming. I'm of the view that 25 day blocks (which fit nicely into a...

I think that the one thing we have to change is the concept of where individual training (IT) and collective training (CT) happens in the ARes. IMHO, the first thing as far as IT is concerned is that DP1 for NCMs and officers need to be identical for ARes and RegF. That requires upping what the...

A dental therapy dog! 🍻

That's counterproductive. In a "total" army you need to work to some level of hybridization between full-timers and part-timers in reserve organizations. That's just the nature of the beast. Take a 600 man part-time battalion with 200 pieces of heavy equipment and tens of thousands of small...

That depends entirely on which end of sustainment you look at. Transport companies are a dead easy sell and would work in small rural armouries. Logistics can be done too. Maintenance is obviously harder because it has a full-time element to it but even here, in a hybrid organization, there is...

Bingo on both counts. BUT, there needs to be an end to end plan and a roadmap. My fear is that the folks that should be making things happen will be so wound up in the three divisions that are in motion that there will be no one to press the gas pedal or steer the "Canada Force" division...

I was a teenager/early twenties during much of the Vietnam era. TV was nothing like today with only three US networks but the constant stream of film and news articles from Vietnam and the summer protests were quite demoralizing. Casualty figures ran into the dozens to hundreds each week. There...

That wasn't my point at all. My point was in response to @Kirkhill 's statement, "de Toqueville marvelled that the American system worked without coercion and relied on voluntarism." America had for well over a century abandoned the reliance on volunteers and the minuteman spirit and instead...

Oh, please, please, please - do not make that an ARes position. That would be the kiss of death. :rolleyes:

Missed this the first time I went past it. I'm a yes and no kind of guy on this. The problem is that the RegF wants to consolidate more as a solution of a perceived force management problem than the creation of a required tactical entity. The inclusion of the "light regiment" is the dead...

It does and it should. History is replete with states that fell when its army decided to go away. Think Afghanistan as the most recent example. You only have to read the many posts in this forum to see that it's pay and benefits which drives Canada's military population. Job protection isn't...

@Kirkhill I may not have agreed too much with this concept in the past - and my frame of mind was very much on the basis of what value for resources invested does one get out of it. That's very much a RegF mindset. I've changed my viewpoint over the years. I'm acutely aware of the role that...

I think that they are both threats. They both wander around looking for low-hanging fruit to pick. I'm not worried about a Russian or Chinese div coming at us over the Arctic or Pacific. I am concerned about our response when either Russian or Chinese mineral exploration ships start setting up...

I've said it in another thread - Those ten HQs can support an expanded force of 30,000, as is being predicted, and even comfortably up to 45,000 or so. More importantly, to me 3,000 pers is a realistic size for a CS and CSS brigade and even a more streamline divisional manoeuvre brigade. 🍻

I still won't like it. :giggle:

Not sure if I'm misinterpreting things here, but we already have six permanent/standing regional JTFs to command joint operations within the country. We don't need army districts - what we need are deployment capable (domestically and expeditionary) units and brigade headquarters. A brigade...

Yup. I figure you can handle 6-8 organizations handily. 10 becomes a stretch. Still, I'd opt to make the one HQ a bit bigger (maybe with a G3 East and a G3 West - or G3 Combat arms and a G# CS and CSS) than to form three more HQs and add another link in the chain. 🍻